USE_GCC vs. packaging
LoN_Kamikaze at gmx.de
Wed Mar 29 18:32:07 UTC 2006
Thomas-Martin Seck wrote:
> * Dirk Meyer <dirk.meyer at dinoex.sub.org> [gmane.os.freebsd.devel.ports]:
>> Thomas-Martin Seck schrieb:,
>>> A package built using this binary will fail unless libstc++.so.6 and
>>> libgcc_s.so.1 are installed, too.
>> They are installed.
>> ldconfig could not find them.
> The problem is: this issue was introduced with the latest changes to
> In short:
> When I build a package of this port on 4.x with gcc 3.4.6 and install
> this package on a vanilla 4.11 system, things will obviously blow up
> since gcc 3.4.6 is not a registered dependency and libstdc++.so.6 is not
> present there. pkg_add just does not know that it should pull in a gcc34
> package, too. And this is new, older versions of lang/gcc34 made it
> possible that I could build a port using gcc34, build a package, take
> this package to a vanilla system, install it there and run it without
> installing gcc34 first to resolve libraries.
> This needs to be fixed, either by reverting the changes to gcc3X or by
> changing USE_GCC in such a way that the gcc port used is made a build
> and run dependency instead of a mere build dependency.
The issue has been discussed before, the problem that a lang/gccXX
package is only a dependency if it was used for building. Previous
builds linked those libraries statically into programs causing larger
binaries, but also making the built package independent from the compiler.
Does anyone have a clue how much bigger binaries get, because normally
I'd prefer the static linking.
More information about the freebsd-ports